reorder_sections

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains an important non-obvious behavior: omitted section IDs are not deleted or lost, but retain their relative order at the end. This goes beyond the basic 'reorder' statement and helps the agent predict the outcome.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences convey both the primary action and the key behavior. There is no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavioral nuance. It lacks explicit guidance on what slug refers to and does not discuss edge cases like duplicate or unknown section IDs, but these are not critical for basic correct usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds crucial meaning to section_ids by explaining partial reordering semantics. Slug is not explicitly described, though its role as an identifier is reasonably inferable from the name and context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with the exact action and resource: 'Reorder sections.' It also communicates the unique partial-reorder semantics, which distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_section, update_section, and remove_section. An agent can immediately tell what this tool is for.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The intended use is implied by the name and first sentence, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose reorder_sections over update_section or other section-related tools. It explains how the operation behaves, but not the conditions that make it the right tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.